Question

1. The plaintiff was seen by a physician for a blocked tear duct. During the treatment, an instrument brushed her cornea with resulting abrasions. Following the incident, the plaintiff’s daughter, who was a nurse, requested permission to review the physician’s records. After seeing the records, the plaintiff filed against the physician. At the trial, the daughter testified that her mother’s records, which she had seen in the physician’s office, had been materially altered by the time they were admitted into evidence. It was also noted that a visit that the patient made after the accident was not documented in the record. Should the court presume from this testimony that there was negligence?

Answer 1

Surely the court should take action for negligence against the physician. But the court will look forward to evidence only. So evidence matters. Here the record of a visit after the incident is missing; that may come crucial. If plalntiff is able to produce evidence of the visit, it will carry the case to the next stage. There will be a further investigation against the physician to know why he is hiding the visit, whether any alteration had taken place in medical records etc.